Pulled over in non-gun friendly state?

[Owen Sparks]

I was privy to an interesting discussion the other day. A man who travels for a living was giving another man the low down of carrying a gun in a non-gun friendly state. In our state you can legally carry a gun in your vehicle so he never got a concealed carry permit. He will not get one either because he says that if he gets pulled over in some state that does nor recognize out of state permits and they run his license, it will come back that he has a CCW and that will get his car searched and him locked up if they find his pistol.

Is my permit probable cause to get my car searched if I am pulled over out of state?

 

[Bubba613]

I wouldn't think so.
I know there was a case in TX where someone had an NRA sticker on his car and got searched for weapons. Case was thrown out for improper search, no probable cause.

 

[simonriece]

There is a published book available

The book in question covers many aspects of out of state carry rights and declarations.

 

[NavyLCDR]

1. They won't know about your out of state permit unless you tell them. In order for CCW information to be returned with Driver's License information, special software is used to connect that information within that state. That software does not interface with the national network.

2. No, it's not probable cause to search your vehicle. If the officer asks if you have weapons, and you answer yes, the only thing, legally, the officer can do is ask you to exit your vehicle, frisk you for weapons, and search only the area of the vehicle immediately accessible to you where you could easily obtain a weapon. Anything beyond that requires your consent or a search warrant. Locking the doors behind you as you exit your vehicle is a good idea to indicate you do not consent to a search. Just don't lock your keys inside the vehicle! If the cop asks you why you locked the doors, "Force of habit" is a good answer, or you can be honest and say you want to be perfectly clear that you are not consenting to any searches.

Remeber, just because you have nothing to hide does not mean that they won't find something!

 

[Deanimator]

If you get searched, either your person or your vehicle, SOLELY because you have a CCW credential, AND are NOT carrying a firearm, that cop is literally SCREAMING, "Sue me! Sue my department!"

Now that is contingent upon you REFUSING CONSENT TO ANY SEARCH. If he forcibly executes an illegal warrantless search, don't resist. If lawful to do so, make CERTAIN that you record the encounter. And EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT after refusing consent.

If the cop has a bass boat, after I attached it to satisfy the judgment against him, I'd donate it to Mythbusters to blow up on their show.

 

[KodiakBeer]

I think you may be a little optimistic about your chances of winning a case involving an illegal search. First of all, you're going to have to bring the case in the very jurisdiction where the cop works - he and his department are holding all the cards. Secondly, you're assuming the cop is honest and above-board when the very fact that he's conducted an illegal search proves he isn't. He merely has to say he smelled marijuana or that you acted "furtively" upon being pulled over.

There is not always a legal remedy.

 

[Deanimator]

I think you may be a little optimistic about your chances of winning a case involving an illegal search. First of all, you're going to have to bring the case in the very jurisdiction where the cop works - he and his department are holding all the cards. Secondly, you're assuming the cop is honest and above-board when the very fact that he's conducted an illegal search proves he isn't. He merely has to say he smelled marijuana or that you acted "furtively" upon being pulled over.

There is not always a legal remedy.

It seems that you've never heard of a 1983 Federal Civil Rights lawsuit...

But hey, if you WANT those things to happen, don't punish them when they do. That kind of behavior NEVER moderates on its own. It always escalates.

 

[Rogue6]

An issue won more on appeal than in trial court

As a practical matter I think that KodiakBeer is right regarding the difficulty of winning in trial court on these kinds of issues, and most people can't afford appeals. You violate another state's CCW laws at your own risk, particularly if you're doing it knowingly (not that doing it unknowingly is any defense).

 

[KodiakBeer]

But hey, if you WANT those things to happen, don't punish them when they do. That kind of behavior NEVER moderates on its own. It always escalates.

The reality is that I don't have 10k to hand to a lawyer for a case I'm going to lose. The cop will lie (he's already proven he's dirty by conducting the search) and I'll lose the case.

If there were extenuating circumstances (he made incriminating statements that were recorded, for example), then why not? But, typically, he's smart enough not to make such statements and just say "I smelled marijuana" (or whatever he may dream up) and get away with it.

One shouldn't expect to get justice in a court of law, or at least one shouldn't expect to automatically get justice just because you're in the right. It rarely works that way.

If you can prove your case then go for it, but the burden is on you to prove it. The system has a 1000 "get out of jail free" cards that the cop can use, and all of them are subjective and don't have to be proved.

 

[Shadow 7D]

yeah, actually most civil rights attorneys make there money on the federal circuit, the feds award attorney fees to the winner and charge the looser court cost, while some to many states don't.

 

[Guns and more]

If you get searched, either your person or your vehicle, SOLELY because you have a CCW credential, AND are NOT carrying a firearm, that cop is literally SCREAMING, "Sue me! Sue my department!"

Now that is contingent upon you REFUSING CONSENT TO ANY SEARCH. If he forcibly executes an illegal warrantless search, don't resist. If lawful to do so, make CERTAIN that you record the encounter. And EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT after refusing consent.

If the cop has a bass boat, after I attached it to satisfy the judgment against him, I'd donate it to Mythbusters to blow up on their show.

You forgot about the "stuff" they "found" in your car, and the testimony of the ten other officers who swore they were there and it went down like the nice officer said.

Or am I too cynical?

 

[rscalzo]

Is my permit probable cause to get my car searched if I am pulled over out of state?

No, it isn't.

I know there was a case in TX where someone had an NRA sticker on his car and got searched for weapons

You have a cite on that?

They won't know about your out of state permit unless you tell them. In order for CCW information to be returned with Driver's License information, special software is used to connect that information within that state. That software does not interface with the national network.

They will know if a non-resident was issued from their state. As far as interfacing with the various state and federal databases, don't bet on it. Infocop (based in NJ) will do just that. It interfaces with several databases with one query. They are constantly improving the functionality. It's popularity has grown tremendously over the past few years. Checking the individual db's was a pain in the butt. How much it does depends on what version is purchased.

 

[lwknight]

I know there was a case in TX where someone had an NRA sticker on his car and got searched for weapons

You have a cite on that?

It happens often enough but , the catch is that its not really the NRA sticker as much as general appearances like prison tattoos and a higene problem and a 22 year old driving a Lexus and every other tattle tail.
Since profiling is illegal , they use the NRA sticker as an excuse to look deeper.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

I really don't know the laws about this. How about keeping a lever action rifle in the trunk unloaded with the ammo separate? In general, rifles have less restrictions and are more powerful. Plus, lever actions don't have that assualt look to them. Just a though.

 

[Art Eatman]

This--and only this--is what is at issue in this thread:

"...if he gets pulled over in some state that does nor recognize out of state permits and they run his license, it will come back that he has a CCW and that will get his car searched and him locked up if they find his pistol."

1. Not likely that the info about his CCW would come back, as noted in Post #4.

2. If it's not legal for him to have that pistol in his car in that state, why does he have it with him?

THR policy condones legal actions only. There is no sympathy here for anybody doing illegal things with firearms.

 

[NavyLCDR]

THR policy condones legal actions only. There is no sympathy here for anybody doing illegal things with firearms.

However, Art, you have to realize that a couple of states will arrest a person for transportation of a gun under the provisions of FOPA when traveling through that state. New York comes to mind immediately. A cop ignorant of the laws in Illinois may arrest someone for not having an FOID. In gun unfriendly states it's completely possible to get arrested for no illegal behavior at all, if firearms are involved in any way.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Art Eatman said:
"THR policy condones legal actions only. There is no sympathy here for anybody doing illegal things with firearms."

What is THR policy toward that gang of armed thugs who used firearms illegally to throw off King George?

Without that illegal use of firearms we would not have a right to keep and bear arms at all. We would be disarmed just like the people in England are now.

 

[MrOldLude]

Art Eatman said:
"THR policy condones legal actions only. There is no sympathy here for anybody doing illegal things with firearms."

What is THR policy toward that gang of armed thugs who used firearms illegally to throw off King George?

Without that illegal use of firearms we would not have a right to keep and bear arms at all. We would be disarmed just like the people in England are now.

Please be joking.

 

[Sam1911]

What is THR policy toward that gang of armed thugs who used firearms illegally to throw off King George?

You want to discuss the American Revolution? Fine.

You want to discuss, plan, endorse, promote, or otherwise invovle THR in any actions which violate current US state or federal laws today? Nope. Find some other spot.

 

[X-Rap]

2. If it's not legal for him to have that pistol in his car in that state, why does he have it with him?

No disrespect intended but that statement is a bit simplistic. There are many states that have prohibitions and as has been pointed out some over ambitious police have caused huge trouble for travelers reguardless of FOPA.
Many of those same nonpermissive states will ask out of state drivers if they have a weapon in the car, especially those from gun friendly states during the course of a trafic stop.

 

[Sam1911]

Well there are certainly two different issues under discussion that seem to have gotten mixed up.

If he's carrying his pistol loaded and in the passenger compartment, he's not under the protections of FOPA '86 and may be breaking the laws of the state he's travelling through. We can't condone that.

If he's travelling directly through a state, on a journey from one state where ownership his gun is legal to another state where ownership of his gun is legal, and has his pistol secured in a separate compartment as required by the McClure-Volkmer act (FOPA '86) then he's legal and cannot be lawfully hassled. (Some states do have problems recognizing this, but probably 47 out of 50 do not.)

In the case of the latter, if a LEO begins the hassle routine, probably your best bet is to stick to the script, "There is nothing illegal in this vehicle. I do not consent to any searches." If asked to get out of the car, exit and lock and close the door. NRA stickers, concealed carry permit/license status (if such info is available), and refusing to consent to searches are not reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed, and thus not probable cause for a search.

This is no guarantee that you won't be severely inconvienienced, of course, or even arrested. However, if the officer is going to infringe on your rights, make them REALLY infringe on your rights. An unlawful search of your locked vehicle without reasonable suspicion doesn't look good in court. Evidence gained in such a search (especially evidence which federal law says was LEGALLY possessed at the moment of your traffic stop) is generally considered inadmissable.

 

[stchman]

Remember, the 4th Amendment protects you. All you have to tell the police is that you don't consent to ANY searches without a warrant. Trust me, if they had a warrant they would not be asking you to search your car.

Cops will ask you "mind if I look in your car"? If you say yes then you have just waived your 4th Amendment rights.

Yes, the cop can say "I smell weed" and then have probable cause to search your car. Thing is they better find some weed.

Being a Missouri resident, I avoid 2A enemy Illinois as much as possible.

All this being said, consult each state's gun laws before planning your trip.

 

[oldbanjo]

In my State SC I'm required to show my CWP when stopped, the State Patrol have asked what are you carrying, being nice. A city cop pulled me once and when I showed my CWP he almost fainted, it scared him and made me nervous. That guy should not have been a cop. I carry SC CWP and out of State NH.

 

[X-Rap]

As purely hypothetical point I am uncertain how I would behave if the gun grabbers in Denver would take control and remove my RTC after all these yrs with at the minimum a 380 in my pocket. I am also concerned what THR's view if it happened nationally?
I have traveled through Ill. on my way to NY. a couple times and have come up with a way to travel while armed that is agreeable considering the alternative but I am glad those days are over now.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I am still trying to figure out how the discussion of illegal firearms possession even started in this thread. The first time I see anything at all mentioned about illegal firearms possession is post #15.